Houngbedji Nikola, Dalton-Locke Christian, Hughes Amelia, Killaspy Helen
Division of Psychiatry, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7NF, UK.
North London NHS Foundation Trust, St. Pancras Hospital, 4 St. Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE, UK.
BMC Psychiatry. 2025 Aug 26;25(1):812. doi: 10.1186/s12888-025-07174-8.
Mental health rehabilitation services support people with complex psychosis to live successfully in the community. This systematic review aimed to identify and compare the approach and effectiveness of different models of mental health rehabilitation.
Six online databases (PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Plus, MEDLINE and Emcare) were searched for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies published since 2000 that described mental health rehabilitation models. The search was extended by screening references and citations of included studies. A narrative synthesis of included studies was conducted, describing the characteristics and effectiveness of the different models.
We identified 24 studies which met our inclusion criteria. The studies were categorised based on the rehabilitation model that they described or the main defining feature of the rehabilitation model if it was not a named model (Strengths-Based ( = 4), Goal-Oriented ( = 2), Holistic Care ( = 4), Community Rehabilitation in Low-Income Countries ( = 4), Illness Management and Recovery Programmes ( = 5), Intensive Case Management ( = 2), and Psychosocial Rehabilitation ( = 3)). The rehabilitation models originated from a range of settings, including high-income (Australia, Denmark, Hong Kong, Israel, Italy, Korea, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, United States), upper-middle-income (China), and low-income countries (Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, South Africa, Sudan, Turkey). While many of the models were shown to be effective in specific areas, such as personal recovery, symptom reduction, and social functioning, none emerged as universally superior, with varying strengths and limitations across different contexts and outcomes.
A range of mental health rehabilitation models exists globally. Whilst some appear suited to certain contexts and some have demonstrated effectiveness in regard to specific outcomes, greater consensus on the specific components comprising a comprehensive biopsychosocial approach to mental health rehabilitation for people with complex psychosis is needed. However, a degree of flexibility is required to ensure the model can be effectively implemented in local settings.
This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024542294) on 2 May 2024.
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12888-025-07174-8.
心理健康康复服务帮助患有复杂性精神病的人在社区成功生活。本系统评价旨在识别和比较不同心理健康康复模式的方法和效果。
检索了六个在线数据库（PsycINFO、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、CINAHL Plus、MEDLINE和Emcare），以查找自2000年以来发表的描述心理健康康复模式的定量、定性和混合方法研究。通过筛选纳入研究的参考文献和引文来扩展检索范围。对纳入研究进行叙述性综合，描述不同模式的特征和效果。
我们确定了24项符合纳入标准的研究。这些研究根据它们所描述的康复模式或康复模式的主要定义特征进行分类（如果不是命名模式）（基于优势（=4）、目标导向（=2）、整体护理（=4）、低收入国家的社区康复（=4）、疾病管理与康复计划（=5）、强化个案管理（=2）和心理社会康复（=3））。这些康复模式源自一系列环境，包括高收入国家（澳大利亚、丹麦、中国香港、以色列、意大利、韩国、荷兰、西班牙、瑞典、美国）、中高收入国家（中国）和低收入国家（埃塞俄比亚、印度、印度尼西亚、南非、苏丹、土耳其）。虽然许多模式在特定领域（如个人康复、症状减轻和社会功能）显示出有效性，但没有一种模式普遍优于其他模式，在不同背景和结果下各有优缺点。
全球存在多种心理健康康复模式。虽然有些模式似乎适用于某些背景，有些模式在特定结果方面已证明有效，但对于为患有复杂性精神病的人提供全面生物心理社会心理健康康复方法的具体组成部分，需要达成更大的共识。然而，需要一定程度的灵活性以确保该模式能在当地环境中有效实施。
本综述于2024年5月2日在PROSPERO上进行前瞻性注册（ID：CRD42024542294）。
在线版本包含可在10.1186/s12888-025-07174-8获取的补充材料。
